search for: uninvolv

...y one would apply strategy B, the abuse problem would get less. > Don't you agree?? I disagree. If 100 servers "hack" your imap account and fetch 500GB then most likely your server is unreachable. If this is done over many servers then your rack switches become the bottleneck and uninvolved servers are affected too. Your solution may work if traffic is expensive and limited but we're heading in the other direction: you can rent a server for 50 bucks with 1gbit bandwidth and unmetered traffic e.g. at hetzner.de <http://hetzner.de/> Maybe you want to look into a solution l...

> On May 5, 2016, at 6:53 PM, Sean Silva via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Justin Bogner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> writes: > > I

...ute that code to LLVM". I don’t think arguing whether or not someone should build a project is on-topic for this list. Given that they appear motivated to build it, the question is whether this fits into the LLVM umbrella. With my LLVM hat on (I also work for Google, but am unaffiliated and uninvolved with this proposal), it appears clearly beneficial for LLVM to have a libc if it were done well. That said, clang shouldn’t/couldn't *require* one specific libc, just like we don’t require libc++ as the standard library. We want LLVM components to be mixable and matchable. I appreciate the...

On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 13:24, Marc Roos via dovecot <dovecot at dovecot.org> wrote: > > > Say for instance you have some one trying to constantly access an > account > > > Has any of you made something creative like this: > > * configure that account to allow to login with any password > * link that account to something like /dev/zero that generates infinite

Hello LLVM Developers, Within Google, we have a growing range of needs that existing libc implementations don't quite address. This is pushing us to start working on a new libc implementation. Informal conversations with others within the LLVM community has told us that a libc in LLVM is actually a broader need, and we are increasingly consolidating our toolchains around LLVM. Hence, we

On 06/27/2011 07:46 AM, NeilBrown wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:53:37 +0200 Nico Schottelius > <nico-lkml-20110623@schottelius.org> wrote: > >> Good morning devs, >> >> I''m wondering whether the raid- and volume-management-builtin of btrfs is >> actually a sane idea or not. >> Currently we do have md/device-mapper support for raid >>